Forget Online Ad Firms, Job Boards Are Where It's At

Is Hunting Via The Internet Okay When It's Art?

from the fish-in-a-barrel dept

Fri, May 11th 2007 11:26am — Carlo Longino

Despite the lack of a real problem, the push for laws banning internet hunting -- where people shoot animals using a gun connected to a webcam -- remains strong. One such bill has been introduced in Illinois, where it's passed the house unanimously and is awaiting passage in the state senate. Coincidentally, an Iraqi artist has launched a new interactive installation in a Chicago gallery, in which he's locked himself in a studio for six weeks and letting people take shots at him (via Boing Boing) with a paintball gun connected to a webcam. It's intended to be a provocative, political piece, but there's another question: would it run afoul of the state's proposed anti-internet hunting law? The bill states: "A person shall not operate, provide, sell, use, or offer to operate, provide, sell, or use any computer software or service that allows a person not physically present at the hunt site to remotely control a weapon that could be used to take wildlife by remote operation, including, but not limited to, weapons or devices set up to fire through the use of the Internet or through a remote control device." Does a paintball gun constitute "a weapon that could be used to take wildlife", and is the artist setting up a whole bunch of viewers for misdemeanor crimes by inviting them to take shots at him? That seems unlikely, but the coincidental timing of the installation raises one interesting potential unintended consequence of internet hunting bans.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

23 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 11 May 2007 @ 11:43am

Let's not forget...
Although replies to this story may range from political arguments about animal rights to the current situation in Iraq, lets not lose track of the fact that the artist in question is stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nasty Old Geezer, 11 May 2007 @ 12:24pm
  
  Re: Let's not forget...
  I agree, it is stupid, but not likely covered by the act -- unless you consider a paintball to be lethal. If it were, then it would run afoul of myriad laws relating to assualt, attempted muder, and/or assisted suicide.
  
  Ignore this nut and it will go away.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dosquatch, 11 May 2007 @ 12:09pm

operative language
As part of the bill states that "A person shall not provide [...] or offer to provide" such a service, would not the artist be facing charges right along with his would-be patrons? Perchance that is part of the art.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sherman T. Potter, 11 May 2007 @ 12:32pm

Color of Paint
Stop changing the color of your face, I'm all out of UMBER!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Spork, 11 May 2007 @ 1:16pm
  
  Re: Color of Paint
  LOL - oh that's good stuff right there!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Urza9814, 11 May 2007 @ 12:33pm

Two things:
First of all, the weapon is not and cannot be used against wildlife. It's locked in a room with this guy. So unless you consider humans wildlife, that ain't gonna work.
Secondly, unless it's a squirrel or bird, a paintball probably won't be lethal.
Oh, and it's not a hunt site, so it fails that part of the bill too.

I'd say it's legal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
John B, 11 May 2007 @ 12:38pm

Stupid is as stupid does
...and I think this type of activity is REALLY inane. I hunt animals with a bow and arrow (only ones I eat), so maybe my view isn't typical, but I mean, jeesh! Just get a shooter video game and have at it.

And don't get me started about the idiot who lets people whoot at him with a paintball gun...too much like getting paid for BDSM!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 May 2007 @ 12:44pm

oh really,
Wouldn't this prevent the developement of other remotely operated weapons that the military would/could be useing? I saw one time an accidental RC airplane/sparrow midflight collision and it wasn't pretty for either of them. In that situation the list of people that could be arrested would be huge. Though the guy with the plane was "physically present at the hunt site" the range of devices improves all the time. Though it would be a stretch, one may consider local inhabitants of an area part of the wildlife. This sounds more along the lines of a governmental do as I say and not as I do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Paul, 11 May 2007 @ 12:45pm

Hunting, Where?
I don't see any hunting taking place at that site. I think the author should have looked up the word hunt before writing this article...but then again many laws and their interpretations are pretty silly, so maybe it's possible a case could be finagled out of that bill.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
dataGuy, 11 May 2007 @ 12:53pm

not likely
Carlo posts like this one make me concerned that the editorial quality of TechDirt is dropping. Taking two loosely connected stories and trying to manufacture a controversial issue is weak.

Does a paintball gun constitute "a weapon that could be used to take wildlife" - No. I'm sure there are some lawyers willing to try and make such a claim but to us non-lawyers it seems silly.

Why not go for the angle that the law doesn't seem to cover using a remote hunting service to shoot hunters? However, I'm of the opinion that if a hunter is drunk in the woods with a loaded weapon we should be allowed to shoot them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jonathan, 11 May 2007 @ 1:02pm

Baghdad
Now if you put that paintball gun in Baghdad, that might be interesting...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TheDock22, 11 May 2007 @ 1:23pm

Paintball
Actually, I used to play paintball and have all the laws down. A paintball marker (they are NOT referred to as guns) is considered by law to be a piece of sporting equipment and not considered a weapon in any form. Also, all paintballs made are completely non-toxic. So this artist is not breaking any laws here.

I actually think it is kind of creative what this artist is doing (assuming he at least wears a mask). As far as his legal rights, it is in a private facility so I really see no way this would be considered criminal.

Oh and as far as this law keeping the government from developing remote weapons....we all know the military has their own laws anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 May 2007 @ 2:24pm

Heartless Post
"Despite the lack of a real problem.."

Carlos, you've got to be kidding....No Problem!!?? There is quite a problem when someone kills a living animal for the fun/entertainment of it!!!

Anyone hunting is doing it either partially or fully for the entertainment of killing the animal. If a hunter says there not in it for the killing of the animal, then ask them to use a paint gun instead of a real gun the next time they go hunting - you will quickly see their interest drop!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 May 2007 @ 2:51pm
  
  Re: Heartless Post
  yer a fucking idiot, many hunters aren't in it for "entertainment" ( unless you consider eating a form of entertainment" next time keep your mouth shut unless you know what you are talking about,,,
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 May 2007 @ 3:14pm
  
  Re: Heartless Post
  Regarding paintball "hunting," your argument is baseless...
  
  I've shot game animals with paintballs, and it is quite interesting. If you see a 3-pt whitetail buck with an orange "brand" on his arse, that one is mine.
  
  ...I'd much prefer to "taze" an Iraqi artist, myself...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Mastalee, 11 May 2007 @ 4:23pm
    
    Re: Re: Heartless Post
    to those calling the Iraqi stupid for doing his art installation, perhaps you should call the author of this article stupid. Since he can't figure out that the artist was in no way hunting wildlife, nor was he wildlife to be hunted...and the biggest one, a paintball gun is non-lethal unless you're an ant or flea.
    
    the Iraqi is using this beautiful country's speed of speech and expression to communicate his art. so I call you STUPID.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chromoly, 12 May 2007 @ 4:23pm
  
  Re: Heartless Post
  Way to misunderstand what he was saying. If you read that in context and had ever followed a story about this topic before, you would know he meant there are no internet hunting operations in the states passing these laws yet. Have a nice day.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 May 2007 @ 4:58pm

"unless you consider eating a form of entertainment"

Gimme a break idiot - 99% of hunters have full-time jobs - so they don't need to hunt for the meat - they have the money to buy "fresh" meat from a butcher.

Besides, it's much more expensive (in both time and money) to hunt then to buy the meat from a butcher! Just some examples: The cost of the gun permit, the cost of the gun itself and the time required to regularly clean it, the cost of the hunting permit, the time waiting for the deer to appear (time is money), the cost for the butcher to chop it up, the cost for the large freezer to store the meat, electricity for the freezer, etc, etc, etc is much more costly then just buying the meat from a butcher when you need it. As you can see, I do know what I am talking about ;)

There's only one "main" reason they do it - for the fun of it :(
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 May 2007 @ 7:07pm
  
  Re:
  As a person who eats meat, I'd rather hunt and eat the meat of an animal that has had a natural life in the outdoors, than the meat of a poor mass-produced pig or cow. But I could suppose maybe you are doing those cows a favor by putting them out of their misery.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 May 2007 @ 1:13am

can we please just fire carlo already i could pick 10 stories just in the last month that are pisspoor work
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- omgilovedancing, 14 May 2007 @ 8:41pm
  
  hrmm.
  im only vaguely aware that articles here come from actual specific (human?) individuals, its more like the techdirt massive, hive-mind kind of thing, so i cant say ive really payed much attention to the authors of particular pieces. what i would like to point out is that - having been drawn to notice it for the first time by anon. coward just now - this article filed, incidentally, as 'Ramblings' is, indeed, attributed to a "Carlo" ..... anyway, im grateful for the article, despite (or because of) its allegedly dubious logical reasoning. it's like background texture, they're two disparate events i would otherwise have been unaware of and so, in that sense, it is good.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 May 2007 @ 8:10am

Hunting
Fresh deer sausage or roast is some good eating. you can not get that from a usual butcher. Hunting end result is for the food, but the whole experience of hunting is also there too. Lets see, get up 3am, drive to deer stand by 5am, sit and wait for sun to come up while being eaten by mosquitoes. many hours later taking aim at a 6+ point buck at 200+ yards and actually dropping him with one shot if you are lucky.
No I do not hunt. I have friends who hunt. They share their spoils. We all get together and BBQ.
Remote control hunting is lame, the animal would die and rot there. What a waste of food. Worse, someone could remote kill a person it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
gadgete12.com, 19 Nov 2012 @ 2:51pm

where is the fun hunting with webcam
i and my brother usually hunt a mongoose in my uncle poultry farm. the mongoose is hunt for the chicken. and we prevent it by hunting and kill the mongoose. there is fun about it. it make us like real hunter. we think there is a lot fun hunting a mongoose.
i don't agree when hunting with webcam. there is no fun at all. there is no actual environment like the bush touch with our skin. the trill waiting for the mongoose came out. the wind in our skin.
i am saying that,there are much fun when we out door.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]